bpwallace49 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I agree. But I am curious... what happens in the meantime? Are all of the provisions in the law immediately null (benefits, costs, etc.)? Good question! I would think not with the national ramifications of the law this is addressing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Meh. This will be resolved by the Supreme Court. No point in getting worked up about it until then. There is enough authority either way to justify whatever outcome the Court wants. Unless Obama can get one of the five conservatives replaced, they will hand him his ass on a platter, collapsing the centerpiece of his administration and taking their retribution for calling them out in 2010. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Unless Obama can get one of the five conservatives replaced, they will hand him his ass on a platter, collapsing the centerpiece of his administration and taking their retribution for calling them out in 2010. Ahhh...sweet...sweet...revenge. Reminds me of an old Klingon proverb: "Revenge is a dish...best served cold". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 Who has pot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Legislation from the bench. What a farce. Commerce clause certainly gives the federal government the authority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Legislation from the bench. What a farce. Commerce clause certainly gives the federal government the authority. Meh. Pretty much what everyone says when court rulings don't go their way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Ahhh...sweet...sweet...revenge. Reminds me of an old Klingon proverb: "Revenge is a dish...best served cold". Them Klingons stole that line....from.... Pierre Ambroise Francois Choderios de LaClos who wrote that in 1782. Let's give credit where credit is due. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Meh. Pretty much what everyone says when court rulings don't go their way. Yeah, I got if from here. How is it not commerce? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Pierre Ambroise Francois Choderios de LaClos aka Sacrebleu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 aka Sacrebleu. True...true. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Meh. Pretty much what everyone says when court rulings don't go their way. No. It is wrong whenever it is done. I can give you one doozy of a an exsample, but that will quickly pollute this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Yeah, I got if from here. How is it not commerce? "It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause," he said. If that were true, he said, "it is not hyperbolizing to suggest that Congress could do almost anything it wanted." If Congress could reach so broadly, "we would have a Constitution in name only," he said. Judge Vinson rejected the Obama administration's argument that no one truly opts out of the health care system, because everyone eventually needs medical attention. In that sense, the judge said, health care is no different than many human activities. "There is quite literally no decision that, in the natural course of events, does not have an economic impact of some sort. The decisions of whether and when (or not) to buy a house, a car, a television, a dinner, or even a morning cup of coffee also have a financial impact that --- when aggregated with similar economic decisions --- affect the price of that particular product or service and have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. To be sure, it is not difficult to identify an economic decision that has a cumulatively substantial effect on interstate commerce; rather, the difficult task is to find a decision that does not," he said. Straight from the horses' mouth. Edited January 31, 2011 by tosberg34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Them Klingons stole that line....from.... Pierre Ambroise Francois Choderios de LaClos who wrote that in 1782. Let's give credit where credit is due. Fixed. Ahhh...sweet...sweet...revenge. Reminds me of an old Klingon Pierre Ambroise Francois Choderios de LaClos proverb: "Revenge is a dish...best served cold". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 No. It is wrong whenever it is done. I can give you one doozy of a an exsample, but that will quickly pollute this thread. Hate to break the bad news to ya', but you simply being in this thread is polluting it. (I jest, I jest...I'm here until Thursday with shows at 5 and 7) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Them Klingons stole that line....from.... Pierre Ambroise Francois Choderios de LaClos who wrote that in 1782. Let's give credit where credit is due. Didn't you do some type setting for him when you were a wee lad? ETA Edited January 31, 2011 by SEC=UGA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 "It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause," he said. If that were true, he said, "it is not hyperbolizing to suggest that Congress could do almost anything it wanted." If Congress could reach so broadly, "we would have a Constitution in name only," he said. Judge Vinson rejected the Obama administration's argument that no one truly opts out of the health care system, because everyone eventually needs medical attention. In that sense, the judge said, health care is no different than many human activities. "There is quite literally no decision that, in the natural course of events, does not have an economic impact of some sort. The decisions of whether and when (or not) to buy a house, a car, a television, a dinner, or even a morning cup of coffee also have a financial impact that --- when aggregated with similar economic decisions --- affect the price of that particular product or service and have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. To be sure, it is not difficult to identify an economic decision that has a cumulatively substantial effect on interstate commerce; rather, the difficult task is to find a decision that does not," he said. Straight from the horses' mouth. So because everything is commerce, this cannot be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Yeah, I got if from here. How is it not commerce? The judge said that Congress DOES have the ability to regulate insurance. He just thought the individual mandate: (1) went too far; and (2) couldn't be meaningfully severed from the law without rending the law meaningless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Thank god for "activist" judges... Keep it up yankees and left coasters, the south may rise again!!!!! An we'll take 4 of the top 11 economies in the US with us... See you guys try and live without FedEX, UPS, Home Depot, Collard Greens, Peanuts, Citrus Fruits, Cotton, Pine Lumber, Cat Litter, and Gulf Seafood for a while. That, and we'll ship all the Messicans to your neighborhoods, what ya think of that, bunch of commie toad lickers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge007 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 The judge said that Congress DOES have the ability to regulate insurance. He just thought the individual mandate: (1) went too far; and (2) couldn't be meaningfully severed from the law without rending the law meaningless. Then maybe it is time to negotiate this. Won't happen very soon-or so it appears! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 So because everything is commerce, this cannot be? I was just about to reply to this when Yo Mama posted the response instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I was just about to reply to this when Yo Mama posted the response instead. Yeah, but you can't believe anything that Megan Foxwagon has to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 So because everything is commerce, this cannot be? Me choosing not to buy something is not commerce. The Obamacare law is trying to say that it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Me choosing not to buy something is not commerce. The Obamacare law is trying to say that it is. I think it would be fine to not have insurance if it was made mandatory that those without insurance could not be treated by any hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Yeah, but you can't believe anything that Megan Foxwagon has to say. Amen, brotha'. That guy brings Megan Foxwagonness to a whole new level. Edited January 31, 2011 by tosberg34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Me choosing not to buy something is not commerce. The Obamacare law is trying to say that it is. Another way to look at it is that people are consuming services without paying for them. That conduct affects commerce, which means Congress can regulate that conduct. See? We can do this all day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.